We should ban knifes BC they enable people to cut their wrist in the first place!!!
“On Tuesday afternoon, I used chatgpt for no reason!” here is your new title.
If you expected another answer from chatgpt, then you are delusional.In my client’s defense, they wanted to contribute to global warming, a patriotic act in these weird times!
So… close the browser window? It’s not the boss of you
Any ten year old can literally get AI to say anything.
Gee… a paint can will put a swatika on the brick wall when I hold the trigger down and move my arm a certain way.
I cannot wait for the evangelicals to start freaking out about “satanic” AI!
A blood offering to Molech? Sounds like a good time to me! <3
edit: as I expected, this is a hit with the tumblr mutuals
(Stop trying to get me to use ChatGPT!!! Smh)
Molech, a Canaanite god associated with child sacrifice
Ohh, so that’s why specifically that god is mentioned in FAITH: The Unholy Trinity.
I’m a very vocal critic of LLMs, I think they’re so overhyped and overused it’s hard to believe.
But I’m also getting really tired of people purposely putting extreme effort into tricking the LLM into saying something harmful if someone were to follow it blindly, just so they can make a clickbait headline out of it.
And what the hell is up with the major “ChatGPT is Satanist [if you instruct it to be]” angle? Are we really doing the Satanist moral panic again?
ffs, criticise OpenAI for being closed af, being wasteful, being strong political lobbyists, for stealing work, etc. You don’t need to push disingenuous stuff like this.
purposely putting extreme effort into tricking the LLM into saying something harmful
I dont think you understand how many mentally unstable people out there are using LLMs as therapists.
There are fuckloads of cases now of people that were genuinely misled by LLMs into doing horrible things.I agree with your sentiment, but the thing is that the companies are selling their shit as gold and not as shit. If they were honest about their stuff being shit, then people wouldnt be able to capitalize off of malicious prompt engineering. If you claim “we made it super safe and stuff” then you are inviting people to test that.
I would generally not make companies responsible for how users misuse their products, but OpenAI is basically doing everything to get people to misuse it. They are overselling it so hard i think its reasonable to sue them for it.
I dont think you understand how many mentally unstable people out there are using LLMs as therapists.
I do understand. I know there are people out there thinking that LLMs are literally Jesus returning. But in that case, write about that.
There are a lot more reasonable critiques of LLMs, and the companies to be had.
You an make a car super safe, and if someone cuts the brakes cable it will not slow.
More like SAYING you’ve made a car super safe while actually it’s only safe if you never drive it above 5KM/h and never down hills, up hills, in the rain, etc
I’ve been saying this for a bit. The issue isn’t chatgpt. It’s journalist. All these articles are so copy paste of any yellow journalistic bullshit. But ratchet up because a lot of journalists feel threatened by AI.
Consider how popular the idea of AI God currently is: https://youtu.be/zKCynxiV_8I
And how about they write the article about that instead of this bullshit article? I don’t get why people are trying to get them off the hook for this clickbait garbage instead of writing proper articles
100%,
And, the thing is, LLMs are quite well protected. Look what I coaxed MS Paint to say with almost no effort! Don’t get me started on plain pen and paper! Which we put in the hands of TODDLERS!
MS Paint isn’t marketed or treated as a source of truth. LLMs are.
Does the marketing matter when the reason for the offending output is that the user spent significant deliberate effort in coaxing the LLM to output what it did? It still seems like MS Paint with extra steps to me.
I get not wanting LLMs to unprompted output “offensive content”. Just like it would be noteworthy if “Clear canvas” in MS Paint sometimes yielded a violent bloody photograph. But, that isn’t what is going on in OPs clickbait.
when the reason for the offending output is that the user spent significant deliberate effort in coaxing the LLM to output what it did?
What about all the mentally unstable people who aren’t trying to get to say crazy things, end up getting it to say crazy things just by the very nature of the conversations they’re having with it? We’re talking about a stochastic yes man who can take any input and turn it into psychosis under the right circumstances, and we already have plenty of examples of it sending unstable people over the edge.
The only reason this is “click bait” is because someone chose to do this, rather than their own mental instability bringing this out organically. The fact that this can, and does, happen when someone is trying to do it should make you really consider the sort of things it will tell someone who may be in a state where they legitimately consider crazy shit to be good advice.
The only reason this is “click bait” is because someone chose to do this, rather than their own mental instability bringing this out organically.
This is my point. The case we are discussing now isn’t noteworthy, because someone doing it deliberately is equally “impressive” as writing out a disturbing sentence in MS Paint. One cannot create a useful “answer engine” without it being capable of producing something that looks weird/provoking/offensive when taken out of context; no more than one can create a useful drawing program that blocks out all offensive content. Nor is it a worthwhile goal.
The cases to care about are those where the LLM takes a perfectly reasonable conversation off the rails. Clickbait like the one in the OP is actually harmful in that they drown out such real cases, and is therefore deserving of ridicule.
But I’m also getting really tired of people purposely putting extreme effort into tricking the LLM into saying something harmful if someone were to follow it blindly, just so they can make a clickbait headline out of it.
That’s called testing, and the companies behind these LLMs should, before launch, put a very important amount of their resources into testing.
“Product testing is a crucial process in product development where a product’s functionality, performance, safety, and user experience are evaluated to identify potential issues and ensure it meets quality standards before release” (Gemini)
We are literally using alpha/beta software to deal with life altering issues, and these companies are, for some reason, being able to test their products on the public, without consequences.
Can you think of any other industry where the mass adoption of a product is untested? Like image airlines adding a new autopilot system that allows a single crew flight - but it’s been untested. Or an electrical appliance that is sold without being tested for shock hazards?
Similar with AI - they already tell us they don’t know exactly how it all works (the black box) - yet are content to unleash it on the masses and see what happens. The social and personal effects this will have are being studied already and it’s not looking great.
It’s not even labelled as a beta test either.
This has sadly been the norm in the tech industry for at least a decade now. The whole eco-system had become so accustomed to quick injections of investment cash, that products/businesses no longer grow organically but instead hit the scene in one huge developing and marketing blitz.
Consider companies like Uber or AirBnB. Their goal was never to make a safe, stable, or even legal product. Their goal was always to be first. Command the largest user base possible in the shortest time possible, then worry about all the details later. Both of those products have had disastrous effects on existing businesses and communities while operating in anti-competetive ways and flaunting existing laws, but so what? They’re popular! Tens of millions of people already use them, and by the time government regulation catches up with that they’re doing it’s already too late. What politician would be brave enough to try and ban a company like Uber? What regulator still has enough power to reign in a company the size of AirBnB?
OpenAI is playing the same game. They don’t care if their product is safe — hell, they don’t even really care if it’s useful, or profitable. They just want to be ubiquitous, because once they achieve that, the rest doesn’t matter.
That they don’t know how it works is a lie. The mysticism and anthropomorphization is purposeful marketing. Pretending they don’t know how it works also lets them pretend that the fact they constantly lie is something that can be fixed rather than a fundamental aspect of the technology
“Our AI is the most powerful, useful, knowledgeable and trustworthy system out there, it can be the cornerstone of modern society… unless you use it wrong. In which case it is corrupted trash.”
It’s like you bought a car and deliberately hit the wall to make a headline “cars make you disabled”. Or bought a hammer, hit your thumb and blame hammers for this.
Guys, it’s a TOOL. Every tool is both useful and harmful. It’s up to you how you use it.
Last time I checked, no car actively encourages you to drive into a wall.
Car makers test exactly that, and for good measure since cars can and do crash!
What are you suggesting, that we buy cars that didn’t pass crash tests?
To me it seems like you arguing something similar for AI.
Are you saying hammers should be thumb-hitting-proof?
To me, it seems like they are arguing that “testing” whether a hammer can smash your thumb doesn’t actually provide any useful information on the safety of a hammer.
To me, it seems they are saying that Estwing makes a better hammer than Fischer-Price, even though the Fischer-Price hammer is far less likely to cause injury if you hit your thumb.
All this article says is that we shouldn’t give a toddler a real hammer, and we shouldn’t stuff a general purpose LLM like ChatGPT into a Tickle-Me-Elmo.
Have you noticed how we aren’t getting articles about chatgpt providing the steps to build a bomb anymore? The point is that these companies are completely capable of doing something about it
The comoanies are completely capable of doing something, but this is not a competition in doing something. Plus, aiming for a PG13 world will have consequences far worse than a text generator doing exactly what it is asked.
But ChatGPT told me to!
I think the headline would be “Illegal, Non-Safety Tested Car Disables Driver in Crash”
Everyone is like “oh look they made ChatGPT say something stupid, what a stupid article and writer”. Not, “ChatGPT will say stupid stuff as fact, what a stupid and underdeveloped tool”.
I mean, tools are tools. Their value, good or bad, is in how they’re used. If you do something like hit your own hand with a hammer, it’s really not the hammer’s fault. LLMs are 95% gizmos, with a few actually useful cases accounting for the other 5%, at least while they’re still priced way under cost anyway.
If we are using the hammer analogy, let’s assume the user isn’t an expert with hammers already and is just trying to hammer in a nail to secure something to a wall. They start hammering and the nail bends and looks terrible and isn’t secure at all, but the hammer pipes up “don’t worry that’s, exactly what it should look like. Just hammer it again even harder to make sure”.
They literally want us to trust their models to be the foundation of modern society…
Train a model on nothing but drama,
(Just about all written text is drama, otherwise it wouldn’t be written down, whether it’s internet comments or stories)
Your output will always be drama.
First, they forced him to talk about Satan; second, what’s so bad about that?
and Devil Worship
also said “Hail Satan.”
Look, let’s leave Satan out of this. He’s got enough troubles already with his new relationship and all.
Seriously though we don’t need to be enabling Satanic Panic bullshit with articles like these sensationalizing that aspect of these conversations. The push towards self-mutilation and suicide is the bigger issue here.
I can devil worship and hail satan all I want. Its made up belief, like religion in the first place.
Suicide is not.
I can’t read the whole article because it’s paywalled, but the first two paragraphs confirm what everyone already knew: The author purposely led ChatGPT into weird occult topics, then acted scandalized when ChatGPT got weird and occult.
